Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Ah. Not being privy to the next patch, I had no idea.

I'm glad to see that willbe implemented; it will add even more variety to the game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Derek

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Here is my Mount Calculator 3.xls, in Excel v5/v7 format.

It was pretty hard to get good numbers for the resulting hull damage, and I ended up resorting to surprisingly large and small mountings!
The mount values I played with are labelled "New xyz mount"

The results table at the bottom has an interesting effect.
If the absorbtion percent is less than 50% for all mounts, the arrays clearly to the least hull damage. However, once the shield strength rises close to 50% absorption for unmounted guns, the arrays start to do MORE hull damage.
That would be because of the 50% limit for crystalline effect; once the unmounted guns are being absorbed 50%, the reduced piercing ability of the banks and arrays no longer has an effect, while the higher efficiency begins to deliver more damage to the target.

The relative hull damage amounts have been scaled to show the resulting damage from a volley of shots, coming from all the guns you can fit into the space of an unmounted gun.

IE: A "Newarray" mount will get 8 times as many shots as a "NewHeavy" mount, since it takes up 1/8th the space.

[ June 11, 2002, 23:25: Message edited by: Suicide Junkie ]

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

I do not like the new mounts. It is too much of a disadvantage to use the medium and heavy mounts because there would be fewer of them on a ship and a weapons miss would really put the ship in a hole.

Although the numbers are better - I work with them a little bit and see what I can come up with...

[ June 11, 2002, 23:32: Message edited by: Captain Kwok ]

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Kwok:

As a devoted Trekkie, I feel I have to point this out.

The tactical cube you made from Moray that you show in your page is NOT a TACTICAL CUBE.

That's a Fusion cube from the Game Armada, which is not considered offcial trek data.

Here is what it looks like:

Borg Tactical Cube

Sorry, but I really want a Genuine trek mod for me to tweak and enjoy to a level of unhealthy obsession http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Ahhh, the cube with a flak jacket....

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

TerranC: Wasn't a fusion cube featured in one of the Borg vs 8472 episodes of Voyager or at least some episode? I swear I remember seeing it there and not from Armada.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

It's from armada. Sorry.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Yeah, you're right. I thought I remembered a Voyager episode with it but I looked it up and I was mistaken.

However...I will include it with the Mod. The reason for this is because if I followed the Trek series to the mark...much of the race tech would be heavily towards just the Federation since they are featured week after week. So, a little liberty is being taken to help flesh out all the races.

[ June 12, 2002, 00:02: Message edited by: Captain Kwok ]

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Derek:

I believe that mounts can be restricted by tech in the next patch.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

At least its a cube, and not one of the other funky shapes that Armada had the borg using.

I mean, sheesh! Everybody knows the borg only use Cubes and Spheres! They're efficient designs! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Regarding the mounts:
I really don't see the problem with the large mounts. They are just as likely to get a lucky string of hits and be ahead of the game.

The arrays reduce variability in hit rates, while the heavy disruptor mounts will increase variability.
The feds don't like to live dangerously, while the klingons do.

If you as a player don't like to take risks in combat, then play a federation type race (or even as the borg if you are really scared of getting hurt). The true warriors will be Klingons! &lt;thump chest with fist&gt; http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ June 12, 2002, 00:06: Message edited by: Suicide Junkie ]

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Yep. Here it is in 1.72:

Quote:

8. Added - Mounts now support "any" weapon type, component families, maximum vehicle size, and tech requirements.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

It is able to work that because of the way that are shields are designed with the crystalline armor ability. SJ can probably explain better in terms of percentages and such.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Greetings.

I've been a little busy for the Last couple of days, so I haven't been able to do all that much. I have tomorrow to myself, so hopefully I'll be able to get a lot of stuff done.

I tested the shields and they work well albeit a little bit different than described earlier. In general, a large salvo against a ship will often damage the hull but leave some of the shields intact. Currently, weapon and shields strengths need to have their costs and strengths adjusted.

Look for an update on the TNG Mod site tomorrow that will include lots of new information.

I need one or two people to help make additional sector type and stellar ability type entries.

Please continue to send ideas as my e-mail box has grown empty in the Last week or so.

Thanks.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The shield meter shown by SE4 with blue boxes only indicates how much more damage the shields can absorb without leaking.

Once the meter reaches zero (or very small numbers), your shields are beginning to collapse.
They will continue to deflect up to 50% of the damage, depending on the piercing ability of the weapon, and the number/tech level of shield generators you have remaining.

Only once your generators have all been destroyed, are your shields truly down.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Greetings.

I have re-worked the TNG Mod site and added some new information. Check it out and let me know if you catch a spelling mistake or want to add a link to your site. The link to the site can be found in my signature.

I'm still working on the Mod as much as I can but it's a lot of work.

I would like to mod the random events and intel projects files with some more trekkie entries - would anyone like to do this?

Edit: The forum is really empty today.

[ June 15, 2002, 23:19: Message edited by: Captain Kwok ]

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Hello!

Work is continuing on the Mod albeit a little slowly at the moment. I'm still working on adding the comps and doing graphics whenever I have the time.

ZeroAdunn has begun work on the Cardassian fleet and it's looking good. He has also donated some of his time working on new events and intel projects. Thanks Zero!

I'm still looking for help in regards to adding more sector (planets, stars) and stellar ability types (storms, nebulae) for the mod, please let me know if you want to donate your time, thanks.

I'll continue to post and update the site every so often with the latest news/status.

Thanks again!

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

The mod you are working on will be most impressive.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

My WonderSystems addon for the systemtypes.txt

There is a planetary system colliding with a storm, which provides lots of cloaked planets, dangerous energy fields, and various other effects around the planets. A great stronghold position where attackers will have to bring in many specialized ship designs.

A nomadic planet & moon system. A nice, dense package of territory, but no star means resupply may be a problem.

A unique planetary system with lots of dual planets. These are just cool to have. Romulans might like to start here.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

I just have a couple of things to say.

For the Borg:
Try using regenerating boarding parties instead of an alliegence converter. It works beautifully (I use it in my borg mod) allowing multiple boarding attempts in a combat and also allows an adequadetly prepared defender a chance to avoid assimilation (through security stations, shields and the like).

Also, making every component on a cube regenerate isn't really necessary. I found that a reasonable complement of borg armor (regenerating), assimilation drones (regenerating boarding parties), and neural link (regenerating master comp) was more than enough to protect against all but the most unholy of foes. More substantial combat damage would be repaired by assimilation nodes (20kt shipyards capable of using zero resources but repairing 3,5, or 8 at levels 1-3) and repair nodes (10kt with repair 1, 2 at levels 1 and 2. Also, the assimilation nodes, while incapable of manufacturing anything, allows on-the-spot studying of captured ships (assimilation) and retrofitting (adaptation).

As far as borg shields regenerating every turn, I think that it would be better to have th crystal armor ability instead. The borg tend to be greatly outnumbered in combat and need immediate shield adaptation rather than replenishment after the damage is done.

As for propulsion:
I hope that you would reconsider SJ's ideas in that department. The design of the nacelle was based on the shape of the ship, to (loosly) contour the warp field to the outline of the ship. After that they were left alone (as in not upgraded) with little attention paid to them except damage repair for the occasional plot device. It was the warp core that got tweaked for a little extra speed, it was the warp core that was retrofitted to boost speed from warp 4 to 5 (or was it 5 to 6?) on one episode of Enterprise.

Essentially it is a simple system (and easy to implement) that is much truer to the spirit of trek. I just don't like the idea of packing the nacelles full of "engines". It just makes the nacelles seem like some sort of rocket that is directly providing propulsion or somesuch.

SJ: Originally I was against the idea of any kind of QN propulsion in trek (since it isn't) but I like the way that you used it as a rationalization for using multiple nacelles. I have to ask though, what is with your propensity for akward numbering? Why say that a nac should provide 7 movement while saying that the hull sizes would require 7, 14, 21, and 28 engines per move as hull size progresses, when you could have just said that the eng give 1 mov and hulls need 1, 2, 3, or 4 eng/mov. My sleep addled brain had to read it twice to make sure that there wasn't some actual reason for it.

P.S. Please pull the defiant out of the normal ship sizes. Seeing the federations most powerful warship portrayed as a paltry 200 or 300kt runt brings a tear to my eye. It was designed to counter the borg after all. Perhaps save it as an advanced prototype (maybe also requiring military studies or such) that while remaining somewhat small has access to specialized mounts (such as pulsed weapon mount and a compact component mount to fit more into its small frame) that other ships are denied. I understand that this will actually be possible in the next patch.

These were just some ideas. I hope that they can help (and are coherent, it is very early here...).

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The 7 movement would be provided by "small" nacelles. "medium" would give 8, "large" give 9.

So, you could have a lightcruiser require 2 small nacelles (14 epm), while a full cruiser requires 2 medium nacelles (16 epm).

Basically, it is a way to force larger ships to use slightly larger engines, and keep a sense of scale.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I still disagree with that diversity statement.

Anything you can do with coil abilities you can do with the reactor abilities.
Plus the fact that losing the reactor in my system kills almost all non-tactical movement. (If the nacelles are still intact, you can use auxiliary power to achieve warp 1)

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You didn't quite read the Last sentence, there.

In the next patch you can specify an upper limit on the valid hull size for a mount.

This means you can make the defiant 155 KT, and have defiant mounts which are limited to ships in the 154 to 156 kt range.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

SJ - Losing the reactor in the current system also results in no non-tatical movement either unless you have emergency thrusters or anti-matter pods to provide a little power.

Woops, I forgot about the hull specific mounts...perhaps then the Defiant can get it's own specific mount for its size afterall.

I wasn't sure what to do with a computer core...it seemed no specific ability was quite applicable...however I got an idea. While there would be no computer core component - Computers would be a research area needed to fulfill the tech requirements for many different comps as they get more advanced. For example, better computer tech needed for more advanced sensors, reactors, etc.

That's all for now.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">When did this happen? Ive latched onto Ent as the one -real- good trek show since DS9... I cant remember them actually upgrading the core? Can ya provide insight?

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Cynapse:

I can't remember the exact episode (I have only been able to watch Enterprise sporadically, though I like what I see) but it was a little quip in the beginning of an ep that stuck in my head since it correlated so well to SE4 and such. I'll keep my eyes out to see if I can spot the rerun.

Kwok:
I didn't think that you would budge on the engines, though I must still cast my vote on the side of the core providing movement and not just being a supply tank, but is there any comment on the borg components? I think that regenerating boarding parties are the way to go. More realistic and fair than an alliegence subverter. What about the rest? I have found that the assimilation nodes are key and add a whole new feeling to playing the Borg.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

QuarianRex:

In regards to propulsion - they are several reasons why the current model was chosen. First of all, the warp core only supplies the power to the engines. It is actually the warp coils inside the nacelle that generate the propulsive forces that move the ship - aka nacelle engines for simplicity. But note that warp core tech and propulsion tech are closely linked with better engines requiring more advanced reactors. And for the other system being more simple - it is not and reduces research diversity.

I have much debate with some who wanted the Defiant as a 150kT escort! But that is not happening - it is either going to be 300kT or perhaps a 350kT new hull - which allows it to be about equal in strength to an Excelsior class ship (recall DS9 episode with the Lakota/Defiant battle). Unfortunately you cannot create mounts specifically for a single type of ship.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

sir Kwok,

Hey, good stuff. I'm really impressed with the stuff you've put together so far (just from reading the Posts, haven't downloaded yet).

Have you guys put in things like replicators and the like yet? I agree with someone (about three pages back) that the Ferengi could use recycling systems on their ships (a la nomads recycling nodes in P&N) and maybe all ST races should have some Version of the recycling node due to the replicator technology. Or would they make small amounts of supplies from the warp core energy? Or both?

It would add a certain "flavour" to the game to have replicators. They could be smallish (1-2 kT) and have modest powers, but would make things fun (IMHO). And with the new patch you could limit the number per ship to say just 3 or 4 to avoid players using too many.

As to the warp core and the nacelles. It sounds like you guys have already put a lot of work into them, so I'll just leave it to you. The system sounds fine, but I'd like to suggest just one little thing. It seems to me (and I can't take all the credit, because I'll seen it discussed elsewhere) that the ST Capitalships are much more manouverable (though their top speed pales in comparison to SW capital ships) in actual combat. I'd just like to suggest that the nacelles should give a bonus combat movement or two. Because the nacelles are going to be matched up to the correct ship sizes, you won't have to worry about whacky movement bonuses occurring (like a galaxy class ship getting a combat movement bonus from a nacelle that belongs on a scout for example).

Them's my ideas for tonight, hope they help.

Edit: Oh, SJ, how do 'leaky' sheilds work?

[ June 20, 2002, 08:39: Message edited by: jimbob ]

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Oh, facilities are good, though I was thinking more along the lines of components. It just seems to me that the replicator would have more of an effect on a ship's function than to provide "Earl Grey, hot" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

In short, the leaky shields work by using the crystalline ability.

You get 100% absorbtion until the SE4 shield meter reads close to zero.
Then you get at least 50% leakage as the crystalline effect kicks in. This Lasts a long time, but is progressively reduced as your shield generators get burned out.
The armor is leaky, too, since it dosen't have the armor ability. Instead the hitpoints are tweaked so that armor will be hit more often than other internal components. It is usually hit first, but not always.

That gives you the "exploding panels" effect, as internal components have a small chance to be destroyed even when there are still shields and armor remaining.

[ June 20, 2002, 19:14: Message edited by: Suicide Junkie ]

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Ahhh,
very cool.
You guys just amaze me with all those snazzy twists. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Jimbob...

I'm not sure about what a replicator component could so on a ship...perhaps give +1 repair or something to that effect. Other than that...most complex parts of a ship were not able to be replicated at least until Voyager. I'll see if anyone comes up with some interesting use for a ship replicator comp.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Hmm...

Replicator

*allows construction of units
*+1 repair

#2000 Organics *Should be interesting*
#150 Supplies usage

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Perhaps a large replicator component around 200kT would be suitable for building components especially mines or satellites. I don't think it needs to make organics or any other resource, but it should use a lot of supplies...thanks for the idea.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

replicators could also be a -2 to maintenance

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Sir Jim Bob,

Impulse engines can be added to your design to give additional tatical movement. Top ships in tatical combat will be able to move around 10 squares per turn.

The Ferengi will have advance scrapping and recycling facilities...replicators are used to increase production. Perhaps some sort of generic facility could provide small amounts of resources produced artificially.

I'll have more to say later...have to go to work now.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

I was thinking that the replicators would be most useful in recycling material. The Captain eats a burger (mostly carbohydrates and protein) and then 24 hrs later has changed most of that into bacterial biomass, which is still primarily carbohydrates and protein, just in an unusable form. The captain's waste is then resequenced into usable food again (ie. burger take 2). That is the beauty of the protein resequencers (Enterprise) through replicators (ST:TNG).

So I suggest that the replicators should reduce maint. or generate very modest levels of supplies. Give em a 1 kt size, maximum 3 per ship, generate 25 supplies each month... that sort of thing. Sure not the most earth shattering effect, but I like the subtle things too http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

I think I'm going to go with the larger replicator capable of building units with a slight maintenance reduction.

The personal replicators don't really provide supplies (which in the Mod are considered fuel not all general supplies like food etc) they just use them, so they wouldn't have any benefit.

I was also thinking of some sort of maintenance reduction centre for ships...perhaps just for the Ferengi...any ideas on what would be a good name for it?

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Grand Nagus's Stow and Tow

Specializing in Federation Technology

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

kwok did you get that file on the cloak example??

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Tesco...

No I haven't recieved any files in regards to cloaking...when did you send it?

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

i sent it to sj to look at... and to forward on to you

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">granted http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">How about recycling node, as per nomads in p&n? It would be nice if races other than just the Ferengi could use this. In fact, any nomadic/trading race should really be able to build this device, which brings me to my next point...

Just in general I have a big concern. If this mod is merged with the B5 and SW mods, and everyone introduces exclusive tech trees to define the genres (lots of armor types in B5, droids in SW, recycling nodes & regenerating/crystaline sheilds in ST) then how can we capture other ships and gain their technologies? It seems to me that people will be sort of painted into a corner on what they can research, and ship capture will be pretty well useless. Guys like the borg and other 'pirate' races would be entirely hobbled if there are not enough races from their 'genre' present in their game. Technology trading will be pretty well useless as well, because heck, what could they actually trade when most of the useful components are from exclusive trees?

I'd like to propose some alternative mechanisms to the exclusivizing of the "genre tech trees", but would anyone be interested?

Just my $.02

cc/ B5 mod thread

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Jimbob:

The TNG Mod is not intended to be used in conjuction or compatible with any other mod. I don't think this will change in the future either.

There will still be plenty of common techs that will be remain very much useful to all races.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Sir Kwok,

Awww, that would be too bad http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif . I guess I just assumed that ST would be merged with the Sci-Fi Cross Over...I personally think the X-over mod would realize only the shadow of it's potential without ST:TNG races and ships. The thought of a Romulan Bird of Prey decloaking off the starboard bow of a Minbari cruiser, or a Dominion fighter chasing down a tie fighter is ... well, I was really looking forward to it! Finally the answer to the eternal question, can the Enterprise (Galaxy Class) take on a Star Destroyer with it's full complement of fighters.

It is still my hope that it will be possible to merge them one day. The technologies in this mod are divergent/unique, and would make for interesting variations in the Sci-Fi Cross Over.

Cheers,

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

The TNG Mod is/has a unique tech tree, numbering/picture system, cultural traits and things of that nature that do not follow any systems established by the Sci-Fi Mod. It is intended to be a stand-alone Mod.

Once the TNG Mod is complete - the makers of the Sci-Fi crossover mod are welcome to use parts of the TNG Mod and convert them for use in their Mod. However, I do not have the time to do that so it will be up to someone else.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Argh. My post got eaten by the Microsoft demons.
It was a biggie, too. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

To summarize,

Tesco: Seems our ideas are totally different. I've replied with mine, hopefully it will be understandable. See what you think.

Minor question:
in the Email, you replaced the cloaking type "temporal" with "subspace". Is that possible and does it work in SE4?

Major Questions for this Discussion thread:

1) Should the Feds get cloaking tech?
- All that was stopping them in the show was morals & a treaty. There may have been covert work going on by section 31.
- If we want the mod to stick to the shows, the player may need to be forcefully encouraged to not use cloaking by not having the tech available.

2) Do all the cloaking devices have to have the same abilities?

I have some ideas for cloaking which will have some side effects on the AI's use of the components, but I believe they will be minor, and that they will improve multiplayer a lot.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

1) Should the Feds get cloaking tech?

Section 31 couldn't have, wouldn't have, shouldn't have a cloaking device in their posession.

*If they do, please give me a whack, as I didn't catch most of DS9 until the war started.*

The U.S.S. Pegasus did have a phase cloak, and it was a testbed for technologies to be used in the Galaxy Class ships, and the original U.S.S. Enterprise captured a romulan cloaking device, so yes, they should have cloak.

It should up to the player whether to use it or not to use it.

2) Do all the cloaking devices have to have the same abilities?

All should defeat Active and Passive, if included in the Mod.

Gravimetric and Temporal should be able to detect cloaked ships and others with ease, but should be VERY EXPENSIVE to research.

[ June 25, 2002, 23:22: Message edited by: TerranC ]

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Note that we don't have to use the same categories as SE4 does. They could just as easily be "Generic", "Klingon", "Romulan", "Federation", and "Other". All you'd need to change is the descriptions.
Heck, you don't even need ability descriptions, and can just not add it to the point form ability list at all. Just describe the overall component as "Sees through cloaks, better at this or that, blah, blah, blah."

My idea for the cloaking involves races building up tech in generic scanners, and with the capture/analysis of a cloaking device, develop a scanner with strength in the appropriate non-generic scan type. ("Klingon", "Romulan", etc)
Thus, if one of your cloaked ships get captured, the rest of your ships with the same cloak might be compromised, and need a retrofit to a newer cloak.

[ June 26, 2002, 02:55: Message edited by: Suicide Junkie ]

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

In regards to cloaking and sensors:

I believe that all races should be able to research cloaking to a certain degree. As it stands now, Klingons and Romulans would have access to a few additional levels of cloak.

After viewing some of SJ's suggestions - I'm not sure about a few items. First of all, I don't believe that cloak-detecting sensors should require cloak technology. For example, several races (Feds/Dominion) at times seem adept at detecting cloaks but themselves do not have the same level of technology to use them. Furthermore if all races were to have access to cloaking, this method could potentially result in many, many redundant entires in comps.txt which for the purpose of the lone feature of comprimising another races cloak tech may not be worth it.

I rather focus on creating a variety of different sensors that can detect cloaks at varying levels instead.

However, I would like to implement SJ's cloaking ideas in some capacity. I was thinking the advanced Klingon/Romulan cloaks would require different types of sensors needed to detect them would be tied into cloak technology at some point.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

SJ:

Send me a couple examples of your cloak and scanner and I'll look over this evening. I'll drop by the chat around 5:30 EST today when I get home from work.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It seems to me that the Feds sensors were huge sensor arrays... and that their ability to detect cloaked ships was not founded in their ability to do the cloaking illusion, but that it was in their ability to construct giant sensitive arrays that could detect minor imperfections in their enemy's cloaking devices.

Though this may have been suggested a million times already, what about making separate tech branchs for detection versus cloaking. I'd suggest making the detection devices really large (~450 kT), and allow them to be placed on bases only (versus on ships which could potentially result in large sensor arrays flying around the universe, engaging in combat... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )

Hope this is of use.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

SJ I replied to your email... with my reasons....

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That is how it is currently and I would like to keep that way. I do like the much larger sizes needed for the detection sensors but not quite that big...maybe around 100kT-150kT.

I made a mini update to the tech list at the TNG Mod site, it has some weapons added plus a few of the ideas I've recieved in the Last week.

I'm planning on adding some temporal tech that is not race specific as well for the next list update.